Does theism lead to immoral behaviour?

[TagliatelliMonster]

..and nor is "the West"

Nobody is talking about that, except you... in what I can only call pathetic attempts at deflection.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Not true.
Capitalism has spread all over the world.
..when Muslims decide they don't want it, they are judged to be in the wrong,
despite the fact that they might be in the majority.

When I look at the middle eastern countries and them rejecting secular democratic values... and then looking at what they prefer instead and see how it affects their society and overall societal health as compared to secular democracies........

It's kind of obvious that they are making the wrong choice by rejecting secular democratic humanism while embracing medieval authoritarian oppression.

Is there an islamic theocratic country in the middle east that doesn't whipe its butt with the charter of human rights, for example?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I did better than answer the question .. I explained my answer!

No. You deflected and started talking about treason, defection and spies.

I only asked about leaving a religion. Nothing else.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

By alluding to treason - which you later recanted.

You also said "it depends" but you didn't state what it depends on.

This conversation reminds me off a TV debate where it took Richard Dawkins multiple tries to get a Muslim scholar to answer the question "what is the punishment for apostasy under Sharia law?". It was very clear that the scholar knew the answer but wasn't willing to give it.

Yep

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I thought I was being quite clear, but I'll try again.
Leaving Islam is not a crime UNLESS you are guilty of treason.

Incidentally .. opposing the govt. by preaching against it is a form of treason.
Where does one draw the line?
If somebody preaches against the govt, because it believes in Islamic law,
I don't find that acceptable.
..and then we come to the subject of blasphemy.

So.... when you said that no authority should force people to believe, you were just full of it then?
Or it was a statement that only applies to authorities that you don't approve of? If it's an Islamic authority, then it doesn't count?

Well, I don't follow any particular sheik .. I have my own brain.
There is a hadith that mentions apostasy.
There are different opinions on its interpretation.

Any extreme view .. such as cut-off the hand of a person who steals a dime .. is unreasonable
to any intelligent person.
One would hope that a mature democracy would include intelligent people.

A mature democracy wouldn't give a rat's behind what someone's religion is or was.
And it would have a secular constitution granting equal rights and individual freedoms for all citizens, instead of a "holy" book that only grants the same to the priviliged few.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Nobody is talking about that, except you... in what I can only call pathetic attempts at deflection.

A bunch of atheists against one voice?
Bah! Just a load of bullies.

 

[muhammad_isa]

A mature democracy wouldn't give a rat's behind what someone's religion is or was.

Well your idea of democracy is different from mine.
Your religion is "Western secularism", and you are right because you say so.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Well your idea of democracy is different from mine.
Your religion is "Western secularism", and you are right because you say so.

It is bit more complex than that. The base is not democracy or secularism. The base is the idea of minority rights.

 

[1213]

You can't make a human being from dust, and if you use a man's rib to create a female, you get a clone of the man.

That I can't do something, is not enough proof for that it would need magic.

Walking on water violates the laws of physics if one is above a certain weight. Spiders can do it, but not you and me.

Yes, usually it is so. That leads to question, could Jesus alter his weight, and how did he do it. By current knowledge, I don't think it can be said to require magic, which I don't believe exists. But, obviously, for some even electricity can be magic, so, maybe it the word can be used lightly.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

A bunch of atheists against one voice?
Bah! Just a load of bullies.

No.

I just asked if in a country implementing Islamic Law as you approved of, people would be free to follow or stop following whatever religion they wish, since you just said that no authority should do that.

And just look where it went from there....
You took it in that direction.

And now that several of us have pointing out your deflection, you resort to the next level of attempt-to-not-answer: the ad hominem.


Good job, well played.
Well.... good try, anyway

 

[muhammad_isa]

It is bit more complex than that. The base is not democracy or secularism. The base is the idea of minority rights.

No, no .. the base is democracy.
A democracy of believers in God WOULD care what people believed.

That doesn't mean that they would necessarily oppress minorities, but they might.
Painting a picture that believers are all incapable of making reasonable decisions is a nonsense.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I just asked if in a country implementing Islamic Law as you approved of, people would be free to follow or stop following whatever religion they wish, since you just said that no authority should do that.

I know what you are asking..
Nobody is forced to be a Muslim.

..but if they wish to be part of the govt. or armed forces, a person cannot defect without consequence.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Well your idea of democracy is different from mine.

Clearly...
Mine has actual respect for individual freedoms.

Your religion is "Western secularism",

That's not a religion, nor is it something I "worship" or whatever. What a strange thing to say.

and you are right because you say so.

No.... that secular democracies are very fine places to live is not something I just say.
It's something that all societal health indexes show. And the irony is that you likely agree with that conclusion also, even if you don't like to admit it.


Consider this thought exercise, so you can prove it to yourself....

Suppose you can right now prepare your next life, which will begin tomorrow morning at 8.
That's when you will be born. You have no control about any of the following:
- who your parents are
- what ethnicity your parents, and you, are.
- what their cultural heritage (religion, customs, etc), which they'll pass on to you, is
- what your sexual orientation will be
- what your gender will be
- what your physical traits will be like (handicapped, athletic, average, body weight issues, ...)

So really, you could end up being anybody you can imagine and you can't predict any of it. All will be made clear the moment you are born.

There is ONLY ONE THING you can choose for this next life: where you will be born and live.
You have to name a country that exists today. You will be born somewhere in that country and grow up and live there.

So....... realizing you have no clue who you will end up being (ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation,... could be anything)...
Which country do you choose?
In which country will you in your opinion have the best chances of prospering, getting an education, being free to follow the religion you want, be as safe as can be (from crime, wars, other types of violence), have easy / affordable access to medical care and food, etc etc etc.


Which country do you choose?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I know what you are asking..
Nobody is forced to be a Muslim.

..but if they wish to be part of the govt. or armed forces, a person cannot defect without consequence.

And again you avoid directly answering the question head on.

The only acceptable answer so that it lives up to my standards of a country I would want to live in, btw, is YES.
Also, any other answer makes your OWN statement about authority involvement of religious beliefs of citizens completely hypocritical.

This is why I find it so funny that you dance around this point so much.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I thought I was being quite clear, but I'll try again.
Leaving Islam is not a crime UNLESS you are guilty of treason.

You are again making no sense.
If you are guilty of treason then you are guilty of treason. This is a separate issue, why do you insist on attaching it to the leaving the faith thing?

You can leave islam and not be a traitor.
You can be a traitor without leaving islam.

They literally are two different things:
- apostacy
- treason

The latter is always a crime. I don't know of any country where treason is no big deal and not punished.

Apostacy however, is only a crime in countries that have no respect for freedom of religion and / or individual freedoms and basic human rights.

Incidentally .. opposing the govt. by preaching against it is a form of treason.

The topic is leaving a religion - not "preaching against a government"

Incidentally, why would "preaching against a government" be treason?
Are you one of those people who thinks the opposition should always be silent and even prosecuted to keep them silent?

Can you say "authoritarian"?
With every post you make on the topic, you're not making a country ruled by "islamic law" look very appealing you know.......................

You're being very vague on the individual freedom / freedom from religion front and now you are downright saying that being in the opposition is a crime like "treason". This is all going very south very fast...

Where does one draw the line?
If somebody preaches against the govt, because it believes in Islamic law,
I don't find that acceptable.
..and then we come to the subject of blasphemy.

Actually, let's linger at the subject of authoritarianism a bit for now.

Do you realize that that is what you are describing here?
Silencing the opposition for the reason of them being opposition, charging people with treason for exercising personal rights / freedoms,..
So what's all that about?

 

[Kenny]

This is you saying that theists are more moral. Just trade out one's atheistic stinking-thinking for some theism to trade failure for renewal and less immoral behavior.

No.. this is adding to what I said. IMV

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

No, no .. the base is democracy.
A democracy of believers in God WOULD care what people believed.

That doesn't mean that they would necessarily oppress minorities, but they might.
Painting a picture that believers are all incapable of making reasonable decisions is a nonsense.

Yeah, but all the incorrect ones are and so are all the atheists. I mean as religious I am not even of the book religions in any meaningful sense. So I am not a correct believer in God.

 

[muhammad_isa]

No.... that secular democracies are very fine places to live is not something I just say.
It's something that all societal health indexes show. And the irony is that you likely agree with that conclusion also, even if you don't like to admit it.

I haven't lived in that many countries, so it's hard to say.
Most people do not have a desire to be poor, obviously.
I am not in agreement with dictatorship.

Consider this thought exercise, so you can prove it to yourself....

Suppose you can right now prepare your next life, which will begin tomorrow morning at 8.
That's when you will be born. You have no control about any of the following:
- who your parents are
- what ethnicity your parents, and you, are.
- what their cultural heritage (religion, customs, etc), which they'll pass on to you, is
- what your sexual orientation will be
- what your gender will be
- what your physical traits will be like (handicapped, athletic, average, body weight issues, ...)

So really, you could end up being anybody you can imagine and you can't predict any of it. All will be made clear the moment you are born.

There is ONLY ONE THING you can choose for this next life: where you will be born and live.
You have to name a country that exists today. You will be born somewhere in that country and grow up and live there.

So....... realizing you have no clue who you will end up being (ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation,... could be anything)...
Which country do you choose?
In which country will you in your opinion have the best chances of prospering, getting an education, being free to follow the religion you want, be as safe as can be (from crime, wars, other types of violence), have easy / affordable access to medical care and food, etc etc etc.


Which country do you choose?

Most people tend to stick to what they know.
I am a UK citizen, and try to contribute to society.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I am not in agreement with dictatorship.

Except when you approve of the dictator, it seems.

Most people tend to stick to what they know.

I wonder if an Afghan woman would "stick to what she knows".
Or a gay apostate living in Iran.
Or an opposition member living in Russia

I am a UK citizen, and try to contribute to society.

So you choose a secular democracy?

 

[muhammad_isa]

The only acceptable answer so that it lives up to my standards of a country I would want to live in, btw, is YES.

Double standards..
If I say "yes" .. which I have .. you come up with the ruling/fatwa about apostasy in Islam.
..which I have explained.
It is pointless going round in circles.